Data Communication and Networks

Lectures 8 and 9

Networks: Part 2Routing Algorithms and Routing Protocols

October 26, November 2, 2006

Routing Strategies

• Fixed• Flooding• Random• Adaptive

Fixed Routing

• Single permanent route for each source to destination pair

• Determine routes using a least cost algorithm

• Route fixed, at least until a change in network topology

Fixed RoutingTables

Flooding

• No network info required• Packet sent by node to every neighbor• Incoming packets retransmitted on every link

except incoming link• Eventually a number of copies will arrive at

destination• Each packet is uniquely numbered so duplicates

can be discarded• Nodes can remember packets already forwarded

to keep network load in bounds• Can include a hop count in packets

Flooding Example

Properties of Flooding

• All possible routes are tried—Very robust

• At least one packet will have taken minimum hop count route—Can be used to set up virtual circuit

• All nodes are visited—Useful to distribute information (e.g. routing)

Random Routing

• Node selects one outgoing path for retransmission of incoming packet

• Selection can be random or round robin• Can select outgoing path based on

probability calculation• No network info needed• Route is typically not least cost nor

minimum hop

Adaptive Routing

• Used by almost all packet switching networks• Routing decisions change as conditions on the

network change—Failure—Congestion

• Requires info about network• Decisions more complex• Tradeoff between quality of network info and

overhead• Reacting too quickly can cause oscillation• Reacting too slowly to be relevant

1

23

0111

value in arrivingpacket’s header

routing algorithm

local forwarding tableheader value output link

0100010101111001

3221

Interplay between routing and forwarding

u

yx

wv

z2

2

13

1

1

2

53

5

Graph: G = (N,E)

N = set of routers = { u, v, w, x, y, z }

E = set of links ={ (u,v), (u,x), (v,x), (v,w), (x,w), (x,y), (w,y), (w,z), (y,z) }

Graph abstraction

Remark: Graph abstraction is useful in other network contexts

Example: P2P, where N is set of peers and E is set of TCP connections

Graph abstraction: costs

u

yx

wv

z2

2

13

1

1

2

53

5 • c(x,x’) = cost of link (x,x’)

- e.g., c(w,z) = 5

• cost could always be 1, or inversely related to bandwidth,or inversely related to congestion

Cost of path (x1, x2, x3,…, xp) = c(x1,x2) + c(x2,x3) + … + c(xp-1,xp)

Question: What’s the least-cost path between u and z ?

Routing algorithm: algorithm that finds least-cost path

Routing Algorithm classification

Global or decentralized information?

Global:• all routers have complete

topology, link cost info• “link state” algorithmsDecentralized: • router knows physically-

connected neighbors, link costs to neighbors

• iterative process of computation, exchange of info with neighbors

• “distance vector” algorithms

Static or dynamic?Static: • routes change slowly

over timeDynamic: • routes change more

quickly—periodic update—in response to link

cost changes

A Link-State Routing Algorithm

Dijkstra’s algorithm• net topology, link costs

known to all nodes—accomplished via “link

state broadcast” —all nodes have same

info• computes least cost paths

from one node (‘source”) to all other nodes—gives forwarding table

for that node• iterative: after k iterations,

know least cost path to k dest.’s

Notation:• c(x,y): link cost from node

x to y; = ∞ if not direct neighbors

• D(v): current value of cost of path from source to dest. v

• p(v): predecessor node along path from source to v

• N': set of nodes whose least cost path definitively known

Dijsktra’s Algorithm

1 Initialization: 2 N' = {u} 3 for all nodes v 4 if v adjacent to u 5 then D(v) = c(u,v) 6 else D(v) = ∞ 7 8 Loop 9 find w not in N' such that D(w) is a minimum 10 add w to N' 11 update D(v) for all v adjacent to w and not in N' : 12 D(v) = min( D(v), D(w) + c(w,v) ) 13 /* new cost to v is either old cost to v or known 14 shortest path cost to w plus cost from w to v */ 15 until all nodes in N'

Dijkstra’s algorithm: example

Step012345

N'u

uxuxy

uxyvuxyvw

uxyvwz

D(v),p(v)2,u2,u2,u

D(w),p(w)5,u4,x3,y3,y

D(x),p(x)1,u

D(y),p(y)∞

2,x

D(z),p(z)∞ ∞

4,y4,y4,y

u

yx

wv

z2

2

13

1

1

2

53

5

Dijkstra’s algorithm, discussion

Algorithm complexity: n nodes• each iteration: need to check all nodes, w, not in N• n(n+1)/2 comparisons: O(n2)• more efficient implementations possible: O(nlogn)

Oscillations possible:• e.g., link cost = amount of carried traffic

A

D

C

B1 1+e

e0

e

1 1

0 0

A

D

C

B2+e 0

001+e1

A

D

C

B0 2+e

1+e10 0

A

D

C

B2+e 0

e01+e1

initially… recompute

routing… recompute … recompute

Distance Vector Algorithm (1)

Bellman-Ford Equation (dynamic programming)

Definedx(y) := cost of least-cost path from x to y

Then

dx(y) = min {c(x,v) + dv(y) }

where min is taken over all neighbors of x

Bellman-Ford example (2)

u

yx

wv

z2

2

13

1

1

2

53

5Clearly, dv(z) = 5, dx(z) = 3, dw(z) = 3

du(z) = min { c(u,v) + dv(z), c(u,x) + dx(z), c(u,w) + dw(z) } = min {2 + 5, 1 + 3, 5 + 3} = 4

Node that achieves minimum is nexthop in shortest path ➜ forwarding table

B-F equation says:

Distance Vector Algorithm (3)

• Dx(y) = estimate of least cost from x to y

• Distance vector: Dx = [Dx(y): y є N ]

• Node x knows cost to each neighbor v: c(x,v)

• Node x maintains Dx = [Dx(y): y є N ]

• Node x also maintains its neighbors’ distance vectors—For each neighbor v, x maintains

Dv = [Dv(y): y є N ]

Distance vector algorithm (4)

Basic idea: • Each node periodically sends its own distance

vector estimate to neighbors• When node a node x receives new DV estimate

from neighbor, it updates its own DV using B-F equation:

Dx(y) ← minv{c(x,v) + Dv(y)} for each node y ∊ N

• Under minor, natural conditions, the estimate Dx(y) converge the actual least cost dx(y)

Distance Vector Algorithm (5)

Iterative, asynchronous: each local iteration caused by:

• local link cost change • DV update message from

neighbor

Distributed:• each node notifies

neighbors only when its DV changes— neighbors then notify

their neighbors if necessary

wait for (change in local link cost of msg from neighbor)

recompute estimates

if DV to any dest has

changed, notify neighbors

Each node:

x y z

xyz

0 2 7

∞ ∞ ∞∞ ∞ ∞

from

cost to

from

from

x y z

xyz

0 2 3

from

cost tox y z

xyz

0 2 3

from

cost to

x y z

xyz

∞ ∞

∞ ∞ ∞

cost tox y z

xyz

0 2 7

from

cost to

x y z

xyz

0 2 3

from

cost to

x y z

xyz

0 2 3

from

cost tox y z

xyz

0 2 7

from

cost to

x y z

xyz

∞ ∞ ∞7 1 0

cost to

∞2 0 1

∞ ∞ ∞

2 0 17 1 0

2 0 17 1 0

2 0 13 1 0

2 0 13 1 0

2 0 1

3 1 0

2 0 1

3 1 0

time

x z12

7

y

node x table

node y table

node z table

Dx(y) = min{c(x,y) + Dy(y), c(x,z) + Dz(y)} = min{2+0 , 7+1} = 2

Dx(z) = min{c(x,y) + Dy(z), c(x,z) + Dz(z)} = min{2+1 , 7+0} = 3

Distance Vector: link cost changes

Link cost changes:• node detects local link cost

change • updates routing info, recalculates

distance vector• if DV changes, notify neighbors

“goodnews travelsfast”

x z14

50

y1

At time t0, y detects the link-cost change, updates its DV, and informs its neighbors.

At time t1, z receives the update from y and updates its table. It computes a new least cost to x and sends its neighbors its DV.

At time t2, y receives z’s update and updates its distance table. y’s least costs do not change and hence y does not send any message to z.

Distance Vector: link cost changesLink cost changes:• good news travels fast • bad news travels slow - “count to infinity” problem!• 44 iterations before algorithm stabilizes: see text

Poissoned reverse: • If Z routes through Y to get to X :

— Z tells Y its (Z’s) distance to X is infinite (so Y won’t route to X via Z)

• will this completely solve count to infinity problem?

x z14

50

y60

Comparison of LS and DV algorithms

Message complexity• LS: with n nodes, E links,

O(nE) msgs sent • DV: exchange between

neighbors only—convergence time varies

Speed of Convergence• LS: O(n2) algorithm requires

O(nE) msgs—may have oscillations

• DV: convergence time varies—may be routing loops—count-to-infinity problem

Robustness: what happens if router malfunctions?

LS: —node can advertise

incorrect link cost—each node computes

only its own table

DV:—DV node can advertise

incorrect path cost—each node’s table used

by others • error propagate thru

network

Hierarchical Routing

scale: with 200 million destinations:

• can’t store all dest’s in routing tables!

• routing table exchange would swamp links!

administrative autonomy

• internet = network of networks

• each network admin may want to control routing in its own network

Our routing study thus far - idealization • all routers identical• network “flat”… not true in practice

Hierarchical Routing

• aggregate routers into regions, “autonomous systems” (AS)

• routers in same AS run same routing protocol—“intra-AS” routing

protocol— routers in different AS

can run different intra-AS routing protocol

Gateway router• Direct link to router in

another AS

3b

1d

3a

1c2aAS3

AS1

AS21a

2c2b

1b

Intra-ASRouting algorithm

Inter-ASRouting algorithm

Forwardingtable

3c

Interconnected ASes

• Forwarding table is configured by both intra- and inter-AS routing algorithm—Intra-AS sets entries

for internal dests—Inter-AS & Intra-As

sets entries for external dests

3b

1d

3a

1c2aAS3

AS1

AS21a

2c2b

1b

3c

Inter-AS tasks• Suppose router in

AS1 receives datagram for which dest is outside of AS1—Router should forward

packet towards on of the gateway routers, but which one?

AS1 needs:1. to learn which dests

are reachable through AS2 and which through AS3

2. to propagate this reachability info to all routers in AS1

Job of inter-AS routing!

Example: Setting forwarding table in router 1d

• Suppose AS1 learns from the inter-AS protocol that subnet x is reachable from AS3 (gateway 1c) but not from AS2.

• Inter-AS protocol propagates reachability info to all internal routers.

• Router 1d determines from intra-AS routing info that its interface I is on the least cost path to 1c.

• Puts in forwarding table entry (x,I).

Learn from inter-AS protocol that subnet x is reachable via multiple gateways

Use routing infofrom intra-AS

protocol to determine

costs of least-cost paths to each

of the gateways

Hot potato routing:Choose the

gatewaythat has the

smallest least cost

Determine fromforwarding table the interface I that leads

to least-cost gateway. Enter (x,I) in

forwarding table

Example: Choosing among multiple ASes

• Now suppose AS1 learns from the inter-AS protocol that subnet x is reachable from AS3 and from AS2.

• To configure forwarding table, router 1d must determine towards which gateway it should forward packets for dest x.

• This is also the job on inter-AS routing protocol!• Hot potato routing: send packet towards closest of

two routers.

Intra-AS Routing

• Also known as Interior Gateway Protocols (IGP)• Most common Intra-AS routing protocols:

—RIP: Routing Information Protocol

—OSPF: Open Shortest Path First

—IGRP: Interior Gateway Routing Protocol (Cisco proprietary)

RIP ( Routing Information Protocol)

• Distance vector algorithm• Included in BSD-UNIX Distribution in 1982• Distance metric: # of hops (max = 15 hops)

DC

BA

u v

w

x

yz

destination hops u 1 v 2 w 2 x 3 y 3 z 2

RIP advertisements

• Distance vectors: exchanged among neighbors every 30 sec via Response Message (also called advertisement)

• Each advertisement: list of up to 25 destination nets within AS

RIP: Example

Destination Network Next Router Num. of hops to dest. w A 2

y B 2 z B 7

x -- 1…. …. ....

w x y

z

A

C

D B

Routing table in D

RIP: Example

Destination Network Next Router Num. of hops to dest. w A 2

y B 2 z B A 7 5

x -- 1…. …. ....Routing table in D

w x y

z

A

C

D B

Dest Next hops w - - x - - z C 4 …. … ...

Advertisementfrom A to D

RIP: Link Failure and Recovery If no advertisement heard after 180 sec -->

neighbor/link declared dead—routes via neighbor invalidated—new advertisements sent to neighbors—neighbors in turn send out new advertisements

(if tables changed)—link failure info quickly propagates to entire net—poison reverse used to prevent ping-pong

loops (infinite distance = 16 hops)

RIP Table processing

• RIP routing tables managed by application-level process called route-d (daemon)

• advertisements sent in UDP packets, periodically repeated

physical

link

network forwarding (IP) table

Transprt (UDP)

routed

physical

link

network (IP)

Transprt (UDP)

routed

forwardingtable

OSPF (Open Shortest Path First)

• “open”: publicly available• Uses Link State algorithm

—LS packet dissemination—Topology map at each node—Route computation using Dijkstra’s algorithm

• OSPF advertisement carries one entry per neighbor router

• Advertisements disseminated to entire AS (via flooding)—Carried in OSPF messages directly over IP (rather than

TCP or UDP

OSPF “advanced” features (not in RIP)

• Security: all OSPF messages authenticated (to prevent malicious intrusion)

• Multiple same-cost paths allowed (only one path in RIP)

• For each link, multiple cost metrics for different TOS (e.g., satellite link cost set “low” for best effort; high for real time)

• Integrated uni- and multicast support: —Multicast OSPF (MOSPF) uses same topology

data base as OSPF• Hierarchical OSPF in large domains.

Hierarchical OSPF

Hierarchical OSPF

• Two-level hierarchy: local area, backbone.—Link-state advertisements only in area —each nodes has detailed area topology; only know

direction (shortest path) to nets in other areas.• Area border routers: “summarize” distances to

nets in own area, advertise to other Area Border routers.

• Backbone routers: run OSPF routing limited to backbone.

• Boundary routers: connect to other AS’s.

Internet inter-AS routing: BGP

• BGP (Border Gateway Protocol): the de facto standard

• BGP provides each AS a means to:1. Obtain subnet reachability information from

neighboring ASs.2. Propagate the reachability information to all

routers internal to the AS.3. Determine “good” routes to subnets based on

reachability information and policy.

• Allows a subnet to advertise its existence to rest of the Internet: “I am here”

BGP basics• Pairs of routers (BGP peers) exchange routing info over

semi-permanent TCP conctns: BGP sessions• Note that BGP sessions do not correspond to physical links.• When AS2 advertises a prefix to AS1, AS2 is promising it

will forward any datagrams destined to that prefix towards the prefix.— AS2 can aggregate prefixes in its advertisement

3b

1d

3a

1c2aAS3

AS1

AS21a

2c

2b

1b

3c

eBGP session

iBGP session

Distributing reachability info• With eBGP session between 3a and 1c, AS3 sends prefix

reachability info to AS1.• 1c can then use iBGP do distribute this new prefix reach

info to all routers in AS1• 1b can then re-advertise the new reach info to AS2 over

the 1b-to-2a eBGP session• When router learns about a new prefix, it creates an

entry for the prefix in its forwarding table.

3b

1d

3a

1c2aAS3

AS1

AS21a

2c

2b

1b

3c

eBGP session

iBGP session

Path attributes & BGP routes

• When advertising a prefix, advert includes BGP attributes. —prefix + attributes = “route”

• Two important attributes:—AS-PATH: contains the ASs through which the advert for

the prefix passed: AS 67 AS 17 —NEXT-HOP: Indicates the specific internal-AS router to

next-hop AS. (There may be multiple links from current AS to next-hop-AS.)

• When gateway router receives route advert, uses import policy to accept/decline.

BGP route selection

• Router may learn about more than 1 route to some prefix. Router must select route.

• Elimination rules:1. Local preference value attribute: policy

decision2. Shortest AS-PATH 3. Closest NEXT-HOP router: hot potato routing4. Additional criteria

BGP messages

• BGP messages exchanged using TCP.• BGP messages:

—OPEN: opens TCP connection to peer and authenticates sender

—UPDATE: advertises new path (or withdraws old)

—KEEPALIVE keeps connection alive in absence of UPDATES; also ACKs OPEN request

—NOTIFICATION: reports errors in previous msg; also used to close connection

BGP routing policy

Figure 4.5-BGPnew: a simple BGP scenario

A

B

C

W X

Y

legend:

customer network:

provider network

• A,B,C are provider networks• X,W,Y are customer (of provider networks)• X is dual-homed: attached to two networks

—X does not want to route from B via X to C—.. so X will not advertise to B a route to C

BGP routing policy (2)

Figure 4.5-BGPnew: a simple BGP scenario

A

B

C

W X

Y

legend:

customer network:

provider network

• A advertises to B the path AW • B advertises to X the path BAW • Should B advertise to C the path BAW?

—No way! B gets no “revenue” for routing CBAW since neither W nor C are B’s customers

—B wants to force C to route to w via A—B wants to route only to/from its customers!

Why different Intra- and Inter-AS routing ?

Policy: • Inter-AS: admin wants control over how its traffic

routed, who routes through its net. • Intra-AS: single admin, so no policy decisions

needed

Scale:• hierarchical routing saves table size, reduced

update trafficPerformance: • Intra-AS: can focus on performance• Inter-AS: policy may dominate over performance